Our interest at the non profit Vitamin C Foundation is the truth about vitamin C. We are open minded, but we have some difficulty with material about vitamin C that you wrote in a book Four Fold Path to Healing, pg. 20 and 21.

We can not find the references. And if they are reversed, this should be corrected.

In any case, we are familiar with two similar "news" reports, but which provide no basis for the proposition that ascorbic acid causes heart disease or cancer.

As I mentioned to Ms. Fallon, we have no interest in harming any reputations, but we do have an interest in correcting wrong health information, especially wrong information about vitamin C.

We have a public discussion forum (http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/forum) which can be used to share and test various ideas. And before we challenge (attack) these pages of your book in public, I wanted to understand the basis for the information you published.

Also, I think that these private email discussions should soon be made public.

In any event, information similar to what you have published has run rampantacross the Internet. As we prepare our (The Vitamin C Foundation)position paper, I am aware of at least 80,000, and probably more than100,000 scientific papers or articles, most peer reviewed, since the turn of the century, that generaly support what Linus Pauling wrote in HOW TO LIVE LONGER and feel better (1986). Today, others write of a C-complex, and I have yet to find a single peer-reviewed scientific paper thatsupports this proposition.

I am writing to you for any references you can>provide in the scientific literature to support the assertions on page 20 and 21 that a "natural" vitamin C is superior to ascorbic acid. As we will point out, numbers don't lie. The price of these 100 mg "natural" C products are some 2,000 times the price of ascorbic acid.

Hi, thanks for your information in my work. It sounds as if your premise is that humans must take in large amounts of ascorbic acid or they will suffer dire consequences. You say that this is proven in the scientific literature by thousands of studies and by some of the best minds on the planet, and that there is not a single study that suggests any toxicity to these doses of ascorbic acid. And that furthermore, you will attack anyone who disputes this idea without sufficient proof (Sally did provide you with the references).

My guess is that if this was true, humans, including the people that Weston Price studied and in fact all indigenous and pre-industrial people, would therefore have suffered from rampant heart disease and other illnesses as they were never afforded the blessings of ascorbic acid. I wonder if you could provide me with the epidemiological data that show that this is the case, that the people Price studied, traditional Japanese people, fisherfolk all over the world suffered from rampant heart and other degenerative disease from lack of ascorbic acid.

Nice deflection. This would lead to an interesting discussion at our forum. I have not been able to find the "clogged artery"study in a cancer journal referenced on page 20 and 21 of your book.

Did I miss Sally Fallon's email?

On a broader note, yes, we acknowledge that those on a "paleo" diet with high omega-3/fat and low sugar, require much less ascorbic acid, but that for most humans on this planet, in the unfortunate position of having to eat the processed foods available, that much higher vitamin C is required. We look to the animals that are continually producing ascorbate 24/7 in the amount adjusted for body weight of 250 - 500 mg per hour as our primary model.

And yes, we hope to continue this discussion in public, rather than private. Why is seeking the truth an "attack"?

Hi, I don't want to belabor this so perhaps we can call it a day after this but I wanted to finish my point of view. No. 1: you used the word attack and that was what I was responding to, as far as I know I don't threaten to attack anyone over their ideas as you did. Second, Sally in an email to me that I believe was sent to you gave the references, if you need further detail you can follow up with her. And, last, and this is the same point I make in debates with raw foodists, low-fat people, vegans etc. "You" say that humans because of genetic defect have a need for ascorbic acid at about 500 mg per hour as proven by the voluminous literature on the subject.

Now imagine yourself in a room of healthy people from Italy, France, Switzerland, Japan, Polynesia, imagine it is 100 years ago, imagine that they have no history or knowledge of heart disease as was even supposedly absent in this country in the elderly even in the early part of this century. It is your job to convince them (or even say my grandmother or grandmother in law both in their late 90's/early 100's when they died) that the research proves that there is an absolute need for this much ascorbic acid (which of course, wasn't even "invented" yet) or they will suffer dire consequences especially with their heart. What would you say to convince them that what you say is so. Personally, I wouldn't like to be in that position.

I did have one patient 20 years ago who against my advice followed the suggestions of Linus Pauling and took 10 -20,000 mg of ascorbic acid per day for all those years (more when he was sick which was rare). He routinely boasted to his friends that he never got sick. I warned him that since ascorbic acid is a potent anti-oxidant and oxidation is how we "remodel" ) ie burn out the old and create anew, that he might become too "stiff". After a few years he got more and more stiff until finally he could hardly get out of bed and had to sit in a bathtub about a half hour before he could start his day. Eventually he was diagnosed with "atypical Parkinsonism" (because he was so stiff but not other classic features of Parkinsonism and the usual meds didn't help him). He eventually died stiff, crystallized and utterly miserable, but at least he had no colds. There are no studies on this, I have no proof that ascorbic acid caused his situation but given the whole situation and with a respect for the philosophy of complexity I had to wonder. Good luck with your work and thanks for reading my book. Tom Cowan

Hi, I would post it along with the study that shows that people who follow your ascorbic acid etc guidelines over the course of their lives, say ages 15 to 100 have wonderfully healthy lives with the absence of heart disease at the least. The study should include at least one hundred subjects. Or it could be that you don't have such a study but you are sure that this would be the case. How about 10 case studies? how about 1 ( I would love to see that case, person for 80 years took the meds you are suggesting). Or could it be you don't even have one single person who has ever done what you are so sure is right? Could that possibly be? If it is so, then I would assume it is prominently highlighted on your site, that is "remember people this has never been tried by an actual person". You are free to do with your site whatever you feel is correct and good luck with your work. TC

I have never seen any clinical evidence that ascorbic acid in massive doses cause free radicals. Since 1969 I figure I have taken over 2 tons of ascorbic acid orally.

My patients put on massive oral doses of ascorbic acid seem to age slower than normal. I am reluctant to put patients of massive doses of calcium. When a patient has trouble with his stomach with ascorbic acid orally, they had better have a medical workup to find out what the trouble is with their stomach. A normal, healthy stomach has no trouble with ascorbic acid.

"Now imagine yourself in a room of healthy people from Italy, France, Switzerland, Japan, Polynesia, imagine it is 100 years ago, imagine that they have no history or knowledge of heart disease as was even supposedly absent in this country in the elderly even in the early part of this century. It is your job to convince them (or even say my grandmother or grandmother in law both in their late 90's/early 100's when they died) that the research proves that there is an absolute need for this much ascorbic acid (which of course, wasn't even "invented" yet) or they will suffer dire consequences especially with their heart. What would you say to convince them that what you say is so. Personally, I wouldn't like to be in that position."

The use of such an example is so off-the-mark at proving any kind of point and seems to ignore the real level of 'health' 100 years ago.

First of all the answer of what you would say to this hypothetical group is simple; They would have seen friends, family and children die right and left of all sorts of illnesses. Statistically the life expectancy 100 years ago was almost half what it is today and mortality from infections etc. was very high. Most people simply did not live long enough to get heart disease or cancer but they would very well understand that if something could have prevented the premature deaths of their children and friends etc. it would be very important indeed. Those people in this hypothetical group who were both old and healthy would be very rare indeed and could consider themselves lucky for whatever reason but they would have seen a great deal more death and suffering in others around them than we do now, so I think that is where the connection might be meaningful to them.

"He routinely boasted to his friends that he never got sick. I warned him that since ascorbic acid is a potent anti-oxidant and oxidation is how we "remodel" ) ie burn out the old and create anew, that he might become too "stiff". After a few years he got more and more stiff until finally he could hardly get out of bed and had to sit in a bathtub about a half hour before he could start his day. Eventually he was diagnosed with "atypical Parkinsonism" (because he was so stiff but not other classic features of Parkinsonism and the usual meds didn't help him). He eventually died stiff, crystallized and utterly miserable, but at least he had no colds. There are no studies on this, I have no proof that ascorbic acid caused his situation but given the whole situation and with a respect for the philosophy of
complexity I had to wonder."

Wow! This is the real problem then with AA. It is just to powerfull of and anti-oxidant. At the right dose it will quench all the free radicals created during normal metabolsim, respiration, daily food consumption, exercise, environmental pollution, etc-nothing else needed.

The problem in debating with them or expecting honest scientific scrutiny is that they even admit they need no studies or proof to back up their claims as long as it fits in with their world view of natural vs synthetic.

Our interest at the non profit Vitamin C Foundation is the truth about vitamin C. We are open minded, but we have some difficulty with material about vitamin C that you wrote in a book...

I'm curious about who exactly are the associates in "Owen R. Fonorow & Associates". Would the person posting as "ofonorow" please comment?

Secondly, I have a working hypothesis that maybe Owen shared his username and password with one of these associates? A lot of Owen's posts in this subforum and others from 2006 and 2007 were well written and reasonable, much different than some of the posts by "ofonorow" of the more recent past. Would "ofonorow" please comment on this hypothesis? Are you the same person posting now as in 2007 and before?

This is with all due respect. Just trying to undertand what's been happening here since I joined. Thanks for any light you can shed on this conundrum.

Mr Van Canada, or should I call you Brian Lukey? I have deactivated your account. You are the first! As I told you many years ago I would if you continued to "spam" this forum which is trying to help people. Your fixation on me is not the issue. But interfering with our mission and wasting our readers time is. Other than your other fixation - Andrew Cutler, I have not found your advice particularly helpful or interesting.

So good luck forming your own forum, I am sure many people here will miss you.